Tusk and Tango in the Night

[He's So Unusual]

I was watching a documentary about Fleetwoood Mac the other night and it got me wondering about a few things. What do you think would have happened had the band played it safe and released another Rumours style album (i.e. Rumours Part 2) in 1979 instead of letting Lindsey experiment around? No one will know for sure, but it's interesting to think about. Tusk is a revered album that many fans name-check as their favourite, but do you think the band benefited from going a little to the left with Tusk? If the band had released another radio friendly album in 1979, do you think they would have left it three years to follow it up?

The other thing I wondered about is Lindsey leaving the band prior to the Tango Tour. How do you think things would have played out had he not left the band? Would Behind the Mask be a better album? Would The Dance have happened? It's interesting to think about, at least for me.

[jbrownsjr]

I don't think the Dance would have happened. The next Fleetwood Mac Album probably would have taken longer while LB did more solo work.

He kept rolling solo work into albums.

[FuzzyPlum]

re: Tusk
Who knows? The line that Lindsey trots out is that Tusk is what enabled the band to stay together all these years. After Rumours they were the biggest band in the World but within five years had slipped back quite a lot. I think a conventional album with a handful of bigger charting hits would have sold astronomical numbers- even more than Rumours. I think they would still have gone separate ways and done solo albums but perhaps the gaps between band albums would have been shorter as demand would have remained high. Stevie had to spend huge amounts of time sat around waiting during the making of Tusk. A conventional, single album may have kept her interest in the band more and reigned in some of her solo aspirations. By the way, I hate the term Rumours 2 which negates the White FM album somewhat. A more conventional album would have created more of a trilogy of similar albums (perhaps each progressing slightly). Of course, a conventional Tusk would have had a knock-on impact on Mirage too. In general though if they'd played it straight with Tusk (and gone on to do a couple more big records) I think they could have been a much bigger band today- closer to the likes of the Stones, Led Zep, Pink Floyd etc.

re: Tango In The Night
Who knows? Behind The Mask would have obviously been a completely different album. It would probably have been more 'Fleetwood Maccy'. Perhaps Lindsey would have left after the next one anyway. Perhaps the Dance would have happened- but in the noughties instead of the late nineties. I wonder if continued participation with Fleetwood Mac in the nineties would have benefited Lindsey more as a solo artist.

[Bandon]

Regarding Tusk...it is revered on this site because its a fan site, but to most others it was a flop given its potential after Rumours. But there was most likely no way FM ćould have succeeded artistically or commercially after Rumours' success. So looking back, Tusk wasn't such a bad move.

[WatchChain]

By late 1979 and early 1980, acts like Fleetwood Mac and The Eagles were starting to be labeled "DINOSAUR ROCK ACTS". The music business was about to shift toward so called "new wave" with acts like The Knack, The Clash, The Talking Heads, The Police, The Cars, Blondie, and Elvis Costello. Lindsey's contributions to the TUSK album are very similar to work from these new wave bands. Lindsey knew exactly what he was doing, and I believe his decision kept the band alive.

If Fleetwood Mac HAD decided to release "RUMOURS II" in 1979, I do think they would have had a few more hit singles, but it would not have helped their reputation in the long run. Moreover, "RUMOURS II" WOULD NOT have sold more than its predecessor. The "Rumours" album had as much to do with time and place as it did music, and you just can't duplicate that. In addition, if 1979 HAD given us "RUMOURS II", we would have basically had the "TUSK" album released in 1982 instead of "Mirage", at least as far as Lindsey's tracks are concerned.

Moving toward "Tango In The Night", I think the time was right for Lindsey to LEAVE. As much as I can't stand the Burnett/Vito era of the THE MAC, Lindsey needed to leave to set the path in motion for "THE DANCE", which was a major turning point for this band that has kept them relevant today. I don't think Fleetwood Mac would be a major touring force in 2014 if it had not been for "THE DANCE" some 17 years ago. "THE DANCE" made Fleetwood Mac cool again. I have followed this band obsessively for the past 37 years. BUT, let me tell you that being a FLEETWOOD MAC FAN between the years of 1988 through 1996 was about as UNCOOL as you could get.

[chiliD]

Originally Posted by WatchChain

...Lindsey needed to leave to set the path in motion for "THE DANCE", which was a major turning point for this band that has kept them relevant today.

ROFLMAO! STOP IT, you're killing me. I need to catch my breath. "Relevant today" {Diet Coke out nose} They're as relevant as the Herman's Hermits.

[WatchChain]

Originally Posted by chiliD

ROFLMAO! STOP IT, you're killing me. I need to catch my breath. "Relevant today" {Diet Coke out nose} They're as relevant as the Herman's Hermits.

Herman's Hermits as well as many other acts from the 60's, 70's and 80's aren't running around the country selling out 19,000 seat arenas. However, there are some act from those days that can still sell out these arenas and have new music debut in the Billboard Top 10 (as Stevie's last album did and the new FM album will most likely). I certainly think those statistics hold some relevance.

[PenguinHead]

Originally Posted by Bandon

Regarding Tusk...it is revered on this site because its a fan site, but to most others it was a flop given its potential after Rumours. But there was most likely no way FM ćould have succeeded artistically or commercially after Rumours' success. So looking back, Tusk wasn't such a bad move.

A very astute observation! I agree that they could not make another album in a manner that would succeed Rumours. Lindsey was so right to break free of those expectations. (though no one could understand that at the time).

Tusk was only a flop when it's sales numbers are compared to Rumours. In hindsight, Tusk is a seminal album in their discography, and over the years has earned more interest and respect. When it was released, I admit wishing -like everyone else- it was more like Rumours; it was a challenging listen. Now, viewing it from a larger context of their history, I love the album more than ever. It shook up the redundancy.

Tusk didn't sacrifice creativity and innovation for commercial purposes. It was edgy and artful; Lindsey took chances and challenged the norm. Got to respect that, especially since they now play it so safe. But they have nothing to lose at this stage in the game. I hope the new album isn't what we expect, but something with an element of surprise; an album that will have some aspects that challenge the norm.

[wetcamelfood]

Part of the perception on Tusk though has to be WB fault as well. They could've said "instead of releasing the title track as the lead single (the most adventurous track on the album), we're going to release something more commercial like "Think About Me". Then on to others (i.e. Angel, etc.). So the public wouldn't even know about some of the different sounding tracks until they bought it, and what would WB care if people didn't like the rest as by that point, they would've gotten their money and the general public may have even thought it was another Rumours if the most commercial tracks were released as the singles which is what WB wanted in the first place but I guess their marketing dept. didn't think that one through.

John

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by wetcamelfood

Part of the perception on Tusk though has to be WB fault as well. They could've said "instead of releasing the title track as the lead single (the most adventurous track on the album), we're going to release something more commercial like "Think About Me". Then on to others (i.e. Angel, etc.). So the public wouldn't even know about some of the different sounding tracks until they bought it,

But I don't think that's the answer. Let the public know what they're going to get or bad word of mouth will torpedo the album anyway. I very much liked Tusk, the single. It's avant garde sound didn't deter me, but when I got the whole album, I still found myself thinking, "What the heck is this?" If you had given me a more mainstream single, like "Think About Me" first, I would have only felt more baited and switched. So, the first single might as well be representative. "Warning to all who enter here."

Michele

[BLY]

If Tusk was released as a single album with the following tracks it would have been a completely different story.

Think About Me
Sara
I know I'm Not Wrong
Walk A Thin Line
Beautiful Child
Honey Hi
Tusk
Angel
Over And Over
Storms
That's All For Everyone
Never Forget

[louielouie2000]

An often-cited reason Tusk was a commercial "failure" is that the entire album was played on the radio at the time of release, and large amounts of people recorded it to cassette. I'm not really sure how much of an impact cassette recording truly had on Tusk sales, but I do have to wonder if that broadcast scared some people off, given Tusk's adventurous nature.

In any event, had the band made Rumours II I don't doubt they could have sold more albums. At the same time, I do wonder how much listener fatigue had to do with the Tusk sales slump. Rumours spent 32 weeks atop the Billboard charts. That's the better half of a year. And nearly every song on the album ended up getting large amounts of radio airplay. The collective public was probably just sick of Fleetwood Mac come 1979. Michael Jackson was wise when he waited 5 years in between Thriller & Bad, and it paid off for him.

All this being said, I have to wonder if the band simply did record Rumours II, if it would have accelerated Lindsey's departure. If that were the case, he may never have returned to the band, and the band's legacy might not have supported a Dance type reunion.

Had Lindsey not left before the Tango tour is another subject altogether. The Tango tour could have been an even bigger monster. Fleetwood Mac was in many ways reestablishing themselves with Tango; they were showing the world they still had it. It's possible they could have gone on to make more great albums- Lindsey's Out Of The Cradle proves his potency during that era. But how relevant would the band have been soldiering on into the early 90s? With the advent of Grunge & the rise of hip hop, my guess is not very. Fleetwood Mac soldiering on with Lindsey into the 90s could have meant the death of the band altogether, in fact. I think the Rumours crew needed the most of the 90s off to reestablish their relevance for a big reunion tour.

To me, the far more intriguing question is what would have happened if the band had quickly followed up the Dance with studio albums, Chris remaining on board. Could they have gained more relevance, or does the on-again, off-again nature of Fleetwood Mac add to it's mystery & allure?

[FuzzyPlum]

Originally Posted by WatchChain

By late 1979 and early 1980, acts like Fleetwood Mac and The Eagles were starting to be labeled "DINOSAUR ROCK ACTS". The music business was about to shift toward so called "new wave" with acts like The Knack, The Clash, The Talking Heads, The Police, The Cars, Blondie, and Elvis Costello. Lindsey's contributions to the TUSK album are very similar to work from these new wave bands. Lindsey knew exactly what he was doing, and I believe his decision kept the band alive.

It all seems like rather a defeatist attitude to me; 'we cant top Rumours so lets do something completely different'. Who says they couldn't have topped Rumours? They were the World's favorite band. They won a Grammy for best album just the previous year. The 'DINOSAUR ROCK ACT' The Eagles topped the album chart for quite a few weeks in 1979. Of the so called 'New wave' bands you listed only The Knack had a US Number 1 in 1979.

I've never quite understood what demographic Lindsey was aiming for with Tusk. I don't have a problem with shifting the emphasis and doing something a bit different per-se. I have a problem more with the execution. All of Lindsey's Tusk songs have a strong melodic base and each one has a great song begging to get out. However, I just don't get who or what he was aiming at in the execution. I disagree with the notion that his songs sounded similar to The Knack, The Clash, The Talking Heads, The Police, The Cars, Blondie, and Elvis Costello. They are similar in that they have some unconventional song structures but the overall sounds just aren't the same.

London Calling had much more anger. Though it explored a range of genre's it was still rooted in its punk rock base. Would/did a considerable number of the demographic who listened to that album really appreciate Tusk? I cant see the angst-ridden rebellious youth of the time going for Save Me a Place (please correct me if I'm wrong here- I was 5 at the time). Neither can I see the likes of Stewart Copeland or Clem Burke accepting shoe box and biscuit tin percussion.

I can see some parallel with Talking Heads, but even then Lindsey's songs make 'More Songs About Buildings and Food' sound positively mainstream by comparison.

I remember Carol-Ann Harris' story about her and Lindsey's visit to the Elvis Costello concert (instead of launching into his familiar rock and roll numbers he proceeded to play country and western songs one after the other- badly. Lindsey stormed out in anger after Carol-Ann and John Courage found the performance so hysterical). Perhaps in this sense I can pick up on some country and western influence in some of the Tusk songs.

I still find it rather disappointing though- we're the biggest band in the world...but I want us to be more like Elvis Costello.

[wetcamelfood]

Originally Posted by michelej1

But I don't think that's the answer. Let the public know what they're going to get or bad word of mouth will torpedo the album anyway. I very much liked Tusk, the single. It's avant garde sound didn't deter me, but when I got the whole album, I still found myself thinking, "What the heck is this?" If you had given me a more mainstream single, like "Think About Me" first, I would have only felt more baited and switched. So, the first single might as well be representative. "Warning to all who enter here."

Michele

I'm not saying it's right, I can just see that happening. I guess they can be commended to a small degree for being honest about it's contents.

John

[chiliD]

Originally Posted by WatchChain

Herman's Hermits as well as many other acts from the 60's, 70's and 80's aren't running around the country selling out 19,000 seat arenas. However, there are some act from those days that can still sell out these arenas and have new music debut in the Billboard Top 10 (as Stevie's last album did and the new FM album will most likely). I certainly think those statistics hold some relevance.

No, they're (HH's, Turtles, etc) not playing one-nighters, they're selling out 6,000 seat casino theaters & fair amphitheaters multiple nights in a row. But, still, both Herman's Hermits & Fleetwood Mac are peddling NOSTALGIA by the droves. A group that releases one album a decade, only to tank in the charts after the "faithful" buy their copies in the first 3 weeks, cannot in ANY stretch of the imagination be considered "relevant".